7 ms·
I think governments should offer free housing to everyone who asks, in their city of choice. "But why should taxpayers pay for that? It's expensive!" Yes, it wo
by cousin_it 2y ago
I think governments should offer free housing to everyone who asks, in their city of choice. "But why should taxpayers pay for that? It's expensive!" Yes, it would be very expensive. But you know what's even more expensive? The sum of everybody's lowered wages, bad bosses, fear for the future, fear of having kids and so on, due to the threat of homelessness. Yes, building housing is expensive, but the removal of fear will pay for it many times over.
- skirge 2y agoEveryone wants to live in the centre of Helsinki, because why not?
- cousin_it 2y agoI'm not saying give everyone the nicest center flat. Let's say an acceptable commute distance away, up to 30min by public transport.
- skirge 2y agoWhy not? Am I worse than others?
- cousin_it 2y agoYes, or just unlucky. The goal of my proposal is not to create equality, but to establish a minimum below which people cannot fall.
- MichaelZuo 2y agoWho gets to determine the minimum threshold? And how will they enforce it?
- titaniumtown 2y agoThe government and laws?
- MichaelZuo 2y agoWhich part of what government? With what legal basis? Things aren’t magically legal and viable in the real world just because an HN user imagines it.
- wpm 2y agoMost liberal democracies have provision within their founding documents and case law to allow for central governments at all levels to provide for the general welfare. You are asking highly vague implementation details about a small hypothetical. It comes off as incredibly rude and like you're fishing for some answer you already mentally dunked on.
- MichaelZuo 2y agoWhy does your opinion matter more than anyone else’s opinion here? Even if you believe my previous questions were too opinionated, responding with even more can only be detrimental, and it is not going to lead anywhere productive. For example, try making a substantive argument as to how a credible enforcement system would come into existence. Otherwise the default assumption is that it will not turn out any better than already existing government systems.
- saagarjha 2y agoI'll add a second opinion to that. Still feeling smug about it?
- MichaelZuo 2y agoSmug about an argument I haven’t seen? What do you believe is the actual argument…?
- wklm 2y agoQuite an interesting perspective, sadly it’ll likely never get implemented in any capitalistic economy
- mmooss 2y agoThat rumor is the biggest obstacle. If you believed it was possible, and instead told others it was possible, it might actually be.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- nineplay 2y agoI'd like to live in Honolulu.
- dh2022 2y agoUp to a week ago I wanted to live in Palisades :)
- spauldo 2y agoLotsa homeless in Honolulu. Funny story, I was sitting in a pizza place in Spain talking with a coworker about the high cost of rent in Hawaii and the homeless people who wander around Waikiki. Some guy (also an American) overhears us and butts in, blaming the Liberals for all the social programs that make homeless people want to move there. My response: how'd the homeless people buy tickets to Hawaii? He didn't have a good answer for that one.
- somethoughts 2y agoI think the challenge is that some will use it as a jumping of point to change their lives and some will use it to stick to their poor lifestyle habits and expect the provider of the housing to provide free house cleaning, free maintenance and free meals and in exchange be a community nuisance. The latter ruins it for the former. As a taxpayer, I would be willing to provide free housing in a lower cost of living area, in exchange for the receiver maintaining the home, no issues with the law and perhaps helping others build their homes, etc.
- cousin_it 2y agoI think it's still much better for a country to have a bunch of untidy annoying people housed for free, than to have the same bunch of untidy annoying people live on the street and serve as a constant reminder to everyone: "keep working and don't annoy the boss or you could be homeless too".
- bluefirebrand 2y agoThey will still be on the street most of the time though The street is where they panhandle for money and get their drugs
- cousin_it 2y agoThey'd sleep at home and use drugs mostly at home, so still a big improvement. Panhandling doesn't bother me as much if I know the people are housed.
- carlosjobim 2y agoWhat you're proposing is classical Soviet communism. Particularly Khrushchev era communism. Much have been said and written about it, if you're interested.
- cousin_it 2y agoWhat nonsense. Did you hear me proposing nationalizing all industry? Having a state ideology? Closing the borders? Removing freedom of speech? No, what I proposed was giving people free housing. Another thing I'd propose is giving people free healthcare. Both these things are good ideas. Mentioning the USSR doesn't make them bad ideas.
- mrkstu 2y agoI can say all day that my ideas are 'good.' But the only place in the modern era that has tried mass 'free housing' are communist ones and all those societies stopped doing it or failed altogether. That doesn't seem like it has worked out as a 'good idea.'
- wpm 2y agoDid you read the article?
- carlosjobim 2y agoFinland does not have free housing for everybody. Finland has never had free housing for everybody. Finland will never have free housing for everybody. For historical examples of that idea, you have to look to the neighbour in the East.
- carlosjobim 2y agoI'm not bothered by if you think it's a good idea or a bad idea. If you want to learn about the largest undertaking of the exact housing idea you are proposing, there is a wealth of knowledge available from programs that involved entire nations and isn't just an idea in your head.
- timewizard 2y ago> Yes, it would be very expensive. But you know what's even more expensive? The sum of everybody's lowered wages, bad bosses, fear for the future, fear of having kids and so on, due to the threat of homelessness. I doubt your supposition. Once you create free housing you reduce your tax base. You are creating a positive feedback loop of costs, lost revenue, leading to more costs, leading to more lost revenue... and so on. You've also not explored alternative means of solving those other problems on a more direct level or have any information as to what that might cost. You could just as well increase direct funding for small businesses and approach anti monopoly law with a renewed vigor. To me it's putting a bandaid on your eye when you've cut your finger. So very nearly the right idea it's a little painful.
- fulafel 2y agoIf free public services caused this kind of feedback loop, rich social democracies wouldn't have free healthcare, free education, socially provided housing for the needy etc. Or do you see housing being special in this regard?
- broadsidepicnic 2y agoI agree up to a point, and I pay nearly 50% income tax. In my opinion this free housing should be built within an acceptable commute ride from city centers, maybe up to 30' ride? And scattered all around, not creating any slums. Hard problem to solve, I'm sure. Nowadays there are years long waiting lists for city housing because they have flats available in expensive areas, which I feel is not the best bang for buck from taxpayers perspective.